Mr Jackson, a former trade union organiser and Alliance Party MP, supported the striking port workers’ calls for eight hour shifts and job security on his Radio Liveafternoon slot today.

He called Ports of Auckland bosses “greedy, filthy, right wing fundamentalists” who were led by a “gutless wonder” mayor.

Intimidation or violence was needed to stop non-union workers being called in to do the striking workers’ jobs, he said.

We first saw some violence on the protest, against counter-protesters. Then there was damage done to at least one car this morning. And now a former MP is advocating there needs to be more violence and intimidation.

Will the CTU and/or the Maritime Union condemn Jackson’s remarks, and say they support peaceful protest only? Or will they implicitly condone them, by remaining silent? For they are the ones who have organised the picket line, so they can’t say it is nothing to do with them.

UPDATE: Jackson now says he only wants the union to be more militant and use greater intimidation, but not use violence, after his earlier remarks were highlighted.

Related posts:

This entry was posted on Monday, March 12th, 2012 at 6:09 pm and is filed under NZ Politics.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.

64 Responses to “Jackson calls on union to be more violent and intimidatory”

Methinks Mr Pearson – if his Melton declarations are to be believed, lives quite close to the Port. I’m sure he heard our “statement by horn” as I transported my family home from a special dinner in Mission Bay last evening.
Horns rather than Thorns.

Weren’t rioting Otago students charged a few years back with inciting voilence?

Surely Willy Jackson is guilty of the same offence, and should be dealt with accordingly. Especially given his high profile, and arguably larger audience than a few pissed students that had been kicked out of a pub and their flats by Police.

What he is suggesting is the way unions historically dealt with strikebreakers. The thing is, back in the late 19th and early 20th centuries the bosses would hire thugs to break the union’s picket line by force too. Strikes often devolved into open street battles that resulted in many injuries and arrests and often deaths. But back then the workers knew that losing the battle could lead to them being forever blacklisted, consigned to abject poverty without a social safety net to save them. Today we have a welfare state, the workers are fighting over salaries well above the average for even highly skilled workers and there are no goons trying to crack their heads. There is no reason for them to resort to the violent tactics of a bygone era. Jackson’s comments come across as obvious grandstandng for media attention.

You know that MUNZ are peaceful chaps, Parsloe keeps telling us so. After all St David Shearer supports them, when he is not nationalising farmland. Willie was just exercising his right to free speech, no need to worry after all , therefore it does not count. Police will just move on and persecute Kim Dotcom

From the Herald:
But this evening Jackson sought to clarify his remarks. In a statement, Radio Live said Jackson “wishes to make it clear that he does not advocate violence of any kind.

“Jackson says his comments on Radio Live today were made in the context of a heated debate with co-host John Tamihere on the Ports of Auckland industrial dispute, an issue he feels passionately about, and they should not be taken as a call for violent action.”

The statement quotes Jackson as saying: “I want to make it clear that when I say ‘milliant action’, I’m talking about taking a stance on an issue in a strong but non-violent manner, in the way that Lucy Lawless took a stance recently with Greenpeace. As I said very clearly in today’s broadcast, I do NOT advocate violence.”

So Jackson directed that there sould be “violent, militant action” and later claims that he did “NOT advocate violence”. Under a post-censorship world envisaged by too many governments, including NZ and Oz, evidence of his outburst could be redacted, history re-written, and we’d have to take Jackson’s word for it.

Adze – interesting – show us your headers !
Google cache only returns your kiwiblog comment when the “violence” word is included in the phrase.
..else feel free to lodge a BSA or Police complaint – they will source the audio, as advocating violence is a crime.
Maybe the Herald has just corrected an error.

I listened to him this Arvo and that quote is mild compared to the rest of his rantings. Brilliant way of undermining his union mates and burning off any support they have. JT was a bit more interesting with his revelation that MUNZ have 15 million of cash and assets.

Why the hell does anyone listen to Radio Live with WJ. I stopped listening to that show years ago when his racism became blatant and nauseating. If there was no audience, eventually MediaWorks would get the message. You are only encouraging him by repeating his toxic messages.

In the meantime his kids go to Kings, he obviously doesnt want them mixing with wharfie type kids

Of course not Paul, they’re terrible people. I mean, one wouldn’t be surprised if their parents get all violent sometime very soon for no reason at all. How awful! Who wants their kids to associate with children from families like that!

Advocates militant action on the picket line, he sits back and enjoys some idiot both losing his job and potentially getting arrested and charged.He gets to continue to mouth off.

stiglet . Good question. The union seem to be offering unemployment to their members.The union won’t be around for long after theese guys lose their jobs. But the union heads will continue marching along on members (dwindling) dues.

Megatron 7.36, you do have a way with words!
Radio Live (actually TRB) wanted our company to advertise on their station. I told them as long as that (insert description by Megatron) worked for them there was more chance of NZ building a nuclear power station on the Waitamata…

He is, and remains a violent, racist thug who comes from a long line of violent, racist thugs.

Jackson is a typical stinking lefty, he is all for democracy until it means that democracy results in him not getting his way, at that stage he reverts to his hard left socialist roots and starts preaching compulsion.

In Jacksons world (all backed by his own words) Maori would be compulsory for all Kiwis. Unionism would again become compulsory. Maori would have a separate justice system and anybody of non Maori heritage would be classed as a second class citizen.

I listened to him this Arvo and that quote is mild compared to the rest of his rantings. Brilliant way of undermining his union mates and burning off any support they have. JT was a bit more interesting with his revelation that MUNZ have 15 million of cash and assets.

So who are the beneficiaries of these funds and assets accumulated by extorting weekly money from poor working people?
How many companies can boast $15 million in cash and assets?

How many members actually knopw that is whats in the kitty?
Time some decent journo did some homework for us all.

Jackson is becoming very moderate. In the past we could have expected him to be recommending putting old gibbo and lenny boy in a pot along with a rubber duck to give them something to play with while the water heated up.

No sour grapes from me. I love the idea that 300 union members have lost their jobs, I love the idea that this is another nail in the coffin of the corrupt union movement.

Perhaps we on the right should hold a meeting, we can then intimidate or beat up anybody who does not agree with us. It might also be a good idea to have this meeting at a time that means we can stop law abiding members of the public from getting to their place of business.

I quite agree big bruv about a meeting.
I don’t expect free ice creams
or handouts
but what will be on the menu?
I could look after the kai and all the
alcohol while you lead the beating up of
anybody that does not agree with us –
if by chance I’ve left the premises before you return
expect a call no later than next tuesday as to where
I’ve stowed the empty cheque book.
cheers and all that.

If by chance any of us should be arrested (and to be fair there seems little chance of this as the union members seem to be getting away scott free with their crimes) I want you and Jinny to assume the role of defending those of us who may have committed the odd crime or two.
From what I have read on another thread the fact that we might be guilty as sin of the crimes we are charged with seems to not matter much in your eyes

March 21, 1984: Ernie Abbott caretaker at the Wellington Trades Hall reached down to pick a suitcase left in the hallway. It exploded and sent Ernie into the hereafter. No-one was ever charged with the crime.

New Year’s Eve, 1999: Christine Clarke died of injuries when run over while on a picket line. She was run down by a large, heavy vehicle driven by a company manager, Derek Paul Powell. Powell was charged with dangerous driving causing death, later upgraded to manslaughter. He was convicted and sentenced to nine months periodic detention and loss of his driver’s licence for two years. The sentence was imposed by a judge who had earlier ruled the SIS had every right to break into your home when it pleased them (a ruling later overturned). Powell had a second trial and was acquitted. Some of the jury were seen patting him on the back and congratulating him immediately after the verdict.

Christine Clarke was 45 and the mother of two.

I am still searching for any details of any employer, policeman, scab, strikebreaker ever killed in NZ during an industrial dispute or for industrial activities. No luck so far.

I said earlier in another thread that I don’t think unskilled stevedoring is worth what the Union is demanding. However I am paused by the revelation of 15million dollar surplus cash holdings from the company. In Dunedin for instance the man who runs the Dunedin museum pays himself half a million dollars a year. All those working in the museum are paid minimum wage, or effectively minimum wage salaries, with no overtime allowance, and promotions don’t equal a pay rise. What pay rises there are measure in the low single digit percentages. I know for a fact that management is terrible. Employees have to attend at least 2 two hour meetings per week without pay, often 3 or 4 meetings, where they basically share feelings. These meetings are ‘voluntary’… I don’t know how to reconcile in my own mind a super profitable company or entity/institution etc with very strong cash holdings refusing to pay it’s workers good wages. I don’t think the Indian man who runs the Museum deserves half a million dollars per year, while the young people working 50 hour weeks are paid minimum wage. That being said I know a company profits if they have low wage costs. I just don’t know how to reconcile it. Someone tell me why it’s sweet for Mr Museum to pay himself what he does. As I said I worked on the docks, and I understand the sentiment of the Union. I really do.

From Stuff (circa 2008): “Intense speculation ensued about the bomber’s motive for the attack. The most popular theory at the time was that the bomb was directed against a particular union, activist or activists, or the union movement in general, although scant evidence was ever found”.

Mmm – “scant evidence was ever found…”

But if you have any new evidence, then perhaps you could approach the Police / tell them about it and maybe claim the $50,000 reward posted in 1985.

Union president Garry Parsloe said Pearson’s claims that the port was now more efficient were “nonsense and misinformation”. The port hadn’t had a ship in a week and was like a morgue, he said. “The port has been destroyed.”

gump
When you say ‘Fred Evans shot a strike-breaker in the knee and then shot a policeman in the stomach’, you seem to imply some murderous intent on his part.
From the DNZB:
Evans certainly shot Johnston, and in all probability Wade. But why should a normally mild-mannered, unassuming man like Evans carry a gun? People on both sides had firearms. Evans owned a gun, and had said he would use it if molested. Strikers that morning were completely outnumbered and were in fear of their lives. A confident mob, with police and company support, mounted a premeditated and well-organised attack. Strikers were hunted through the streets and into private homes. The violence was as vicious as anything seen in a civil conflict in New Zealand.

I don’t get why the Police just stood by and allowed the strikers to interfere with people going about their lawful business.

What confidence does that give the general population that when thugs of a different sort (thieves, burglars, rapists…) arrives at a persons home that the homeowner will receive protection from Police.